So far, operators of the plant ---- which include Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric ---- have spent some $48 million in shutting the plant down, inspecting it to see what went wrong, and performing repairs on some of the equipment.

But it could cost an additional $25 million to get it back up and generating electricity.

We understand that private utilities such as SCE and SDG&E have to be allowed to charge their customers enough to cover their costs and make a fair profit for their shareholders.

But with a captive audience, which a government-sanctioned utility has, comes certain responsibilities.

We do not believe that electrical utility ratepayers should be on the hook if it turns out that the equipment installed at San Onofre was defective to begin with. Already, a federal probe into the excessive wear on tubes in the steam generators is citing a botched computer analysis, which resulted in a faulty design.

If this finding is upheld, there is no reason that ratepayers should have to pay either to replace the generators or to shut down the plant altogether.

Any contractors who provided defective work or materials should be held liable for their failings; and if they don't have the resources to make good the costs to the San Onofre operators, then those costs should be borne by the shareholders of the companies that own San Onofre.

Once the plant is offline for nine months ---- as seems almost certain to occur ---- then SCE and SDG&E may have to seek permission from the state Public Utilities Commission to continue charging ratepayers for a non-operating plant.

We urge the PUC to take a careful look at any rate requests resulting from the San Onofre shutdown, and to assign ratepayers responsibility only for those costs related to normal operations of an electrical utility.

Any findings of incompetence or negligence should come with an accompanying finding of financial responsibility.